Vaccine

MacDre said:
Decent analysis but you are minimizing the death of approximately 500 kids. I could be wrong but I was under the impression that side effects from vaccines occur soon after administering the vaccine. The vaccine has been administered world wide and appears to be safe and effective. You scared homie?

So are you opposed to a harm reduction strategy because of all of the politically motivated speculation and conjecture going around?
Click to expand...

The myocarditis (in the mRNA) and blood clot (in the non mRNA vaccines) are showing up as far as a month out. In fact, at this point, I'm kind of shocked that there's hasn't been an official recommendation from pediatricians that boys who receive the second dose of Pfizer sit out exercising (such as club soccer) for a week. There there's the weird one impacting women's cycles. Then there are bunch of other ones (such as GB paralysis) which are very rare but also typical of other vaccinations. So "safe" is somewhat in the beholder.

"effective" is also a definitional issue. Effective in reducing death and hospitalization and long COVID....absolutely....but for kids that's already on the floor so what's the point. Effective in reducing transmission....that one is more elusive because it's becoming apparent that the breakthrough infections are really high and the latest in the Lancet puts the effectiveness date at around 200 days now.

My impression the vast majority of people rushing out to vaccinate their kids are just scared of the virus. The vast majority of people digging in their heels are scared of the vaccine. But really all we are doing here is throwing darts.
 
Hüsker Dü said:
It’s not funny it’s sad. It’s sad how many people have been convinced to protest intelligence by risking their lives and the lives of others. Many of these people claim to be motivated by pious intentions, but from my POV they are clearly more closely aligned with evil. Karma can be deadly.
Click to expand...
How about some onions to go with your chocolate ice cream.
 
espola said:
I suggest you educate yourself on what is actually in the proposed tax law changes.

I am also amused by the proposition on the concept that "wealth tax" is unconstitutional since it is the foundation of the funding of most local and state governments.
Click to expand...
Coocoo.
 
MacDre said:
Decent analysis but you are minimizing the death of approximately 500 kids. I could be wrong but I was under the impression that side effects from vaccines occur soon after administering the vaccine. The vaccine has been administered world wide and appears to be safe and effective. You scared homie?

So are you opposed to a harm reduction strategy because of all of the politically motivated speculation and conjecture going around?
Click to expand...
Harm reduction strategy?

Of those 500 or so kids, most has serious long term health issues.

The logical course of action would be to tell parents of kids with serious health issues to have those kids vaxxed.

You don't need to mandate the vaxx to the rest of the 70 million population who have no risk.

And back to the original point. We don't have LONG terms studies on possible side affects. Saying most people experience an issue soon after receiving a vax is a very different concept with knowing IF there are long term issues.

On a general basis we dont know long term if...

- is it safe to administer the vax to pregnant women
- to people who have certain types of health issues
- to people currently taking certain types of drugs for other issues
etc etc.

Those are things that are done with other drugs brought to market. That takes years of testing.

To mandate a vax that has not gone through rigorous long term studies in not wise policy not quite frankly ethical.
 
To the unrealized gains issues.


Unrealized capital gains are not income, they are simply increases in value.

If your home was worth $200,000 last year and $300,000 this year, you have an unrealized capital gain of $100k. A 15% tax bill on that value increase means the homeowner would have to pay $15,000 to the IRS.

--

Biden is suggesting that he will pay for the new spending by taxing people not on what they have earned but what they could earn from selling assets. Most people have assets that increase in value over time. Consider a family home. Over the course of many years, it can easily double in value, but you do not “realize” that money unless you sell it. Biden is suggesting that the government should start taxing you based on any increased value of the things you own, even though you have not actually made that money. It doesn’t matter that the home or stock or art could ultimately go down in value after you are taxed on the higher value. Indeed, if you tax some unrealized gains, you could in extreme cases force people to sell assets like a home to pay the tax on income that they did not make.

--

Additionally, another issue arises if the previously taxed asset goes down in value; an issue where the depreciation or loss becomes a negative tax liability. Meaning if you already paid taxes on an increase in value for an asset, and the following year that asset drops in value, the federal government would then owe you money to recompensate you for a realized loss. If you paid $15k on a $100k increase in the value of an asset, and the following year that asset drops in value by $100k, the $15k you paid would be deducted from the current year tax liability.

There are constitutional issues with the federal government taxing wealth or assets; however, the overarching premise behind every proposal is that all wealth belongs to the government. You hear this ideological perspective when people say “tax expenditures” or spending in the tax code. The idea is that your income is what the government permits you to keep, NOT what your labor has achieved.

The ideology behind taxing “unrealized capital gains” is the same ideology in the premise of “sharing the wealth.” It is an ideology that stems from a belief that your dollar earned comes at the cost of my dollar not achieved.

--

 
Grace T. said:
The myocarditis (in the mRNA) and blood clot (in the non mRNA vaccines) are showing up as far as a month out. In fact, at this point, I'm kind of shocked that there's hasn't been an official recommendation from pediatricians that boys who receive the second dose of Pfizer sit out exercising (such as club soccer) for a week. There there's the weird one impacting women's cycles. Then there are bunch of other ones (such as GB paralysis) which are very rare but also typical of other vaccinations. So "safe" is somewhat in the beholder.

"effective" is also a definitional issue. Effective in reducing death and hospitalization and long COVID....absolutely....but for kids that's already on the floor so what's the point. Effective in reducing transmission....that one is more elusive because it's becoming apparent that the breakthrough infections are really high and the latest in the Lancet puts the effectiveness date at around 200 days now.

My impression the vast majority of people rushing out to vaccinate their kids are just scared of the virus. The vast majority of people digging in their heels are scared of the vaccine. But really all we are doing here is throwing darts.
Click to expand...
If I hear a another so-called expert on TV say that approval of the vaccination for 5-11 year old's is a "turning point" in the fight against Covid, I'm going to have to buy a new tv, or at least a new remote.

I put the over/under on 5-11 vaccinations at 40%, but I could be convinced to set it lower.
 
Bruddah IZ said:
How about some onions to go with your chocolate ice cream.
Click to expand...
1635442226553.png
Add this sauce to go on top of Husker's chocoolate ice cream.

I'm still tripping out today. Dre wants me to rush my child to get the jab. Why? My buddy Colin just told me one of his clients just got whacked by a company in San Francisco. Dude has worked for company the last 14 years. The last three years from home in Wildomar CA. Basically, works from home. He cannot get jabbed for religious reasons and tomorrow is his last day, regardless if he works from home or in the office. The owner is big time political asshole and is showing his cards and showing this poor guy the door. He's flying up tomorrow morning to walk in and officially get whacked. He has some ER funds and his attorney is taking his case pro bono. This is crazy that were watching people get fired for no jabber doo and kids will not be allowed to play without jabs and boosters and masks.
 
Desert Hound said:
To the unrealized gains issues.


Unrealized capital gains are not income, they are simply increases in value.

If your home was worth $200,000 last year and $300,000 this year, you have an unrealized capital gain of $100k. A 15% tax bill on that value increase means the homeowner would have to pay $15,000 to the IRS.

--

Biden is suggesting that he will pay for the new spending by taxing people not on what they have earned but what they could earn from selling assets. Most people have assets that increase in value over time. Consider a family home. Over the course of many years, it can easily double in value, but you do not “realize” that money unless you sell it. Biden is suggesting that the government should start taxing you based on any increased value of the things you own, even though you have not actually made that money. It doesn’t matter that the home or stock or art could ultimately go down in value after you are taxed on the higher value. Indeed, if you tax some unrealized gains, you could in extreme cases force people to sell assets like a home to pay the tax on income that they did not make.

--

Additionally, another issue arises if the previously taxed asset goes down in value; an issue where the depreciation or loss becomes a negative tax liability. Meaning if you already paid taxes on an increase in value for an asset, and the following year that asset drops in value, the federal government would then owe you money to recompensate you for a realized loss. If you paid $15k on a $100k increase in the value of an asset, and the following year that asset drops in value by $100k, the $15k you paid would be deducted from the current year tax liability.

There are constitutional issues with the federal government taxing wealth or assets; however, the overarching premise behind every proposal is that all wealth belongs to the government. You hear this ideological perspective when people say “tax expenditures” or spending in the tax code. The idea is that your income is what the government permits you to keep, NOT what your labor has achieved.

The ideology behind taxing “unrealized capital gains” is the same ideology in the premise of “sharing the wealth.” It is an ideology that stems from a belief that your dollar earned comes at the cost of my dollar not achieved.

--
Click to expand...

I'm not surprised that you quote those whiney little bitches.
 
Desert Hound said:
Harm reduction strategy?

Of those 500 or so kids, most has serious long term health issues.

The logical course of action would be to tell parents of kids with serious health issues to have those kids vaxxed.

You don't need to mandate the vaxx to the rest of the 70 million population who have no risk.

And back to the original point. We don't have LONG terms studies on possible side affects. Saying most people experience an issue soon after receiving a vax is a very different concept with knowing IF there are long term issues.

On a general basis we dont know long term if...

- is it safe to administer the vax to pregnant women
- to people who have certain types of health issues
- to people currently taking certain types of drugs for other issues
etc etc.

Those are things that are done with other drugs brought to market. That takes years of testing.

To mandate a vax that has not gone through rigorous long term studies in not wise policy not quite frankly ethical.
Click to expand...

They didn't really even study the risks involved with vaccinating people who had COVID before. We are only now beginning to understand they may be superimmune. But we still don't have a handle on what the side effects. Anecdotally, we know people who have had it before have been having much more severe side reactions (such as vomiting and nausea) from the first shot as opposed to the second shot. But the point is they didn't study it.
 
watfly said:
If I hear a another so-called expert on TV say that approval of the vaccination for 5-11 year old's is a "turning point" in the fight against Covid, I'm going to have to buy a new tv, or at least a new remote.

I put the over/under on 5-11 vaccinations at 40%, but I could be convinced to set it lower.
Click to expand...
TV= Tell you a vision. I quit TV and it changed my life for ever. Turning point on their crusade is to vax everyone. The one's who refuse will lose their job and won't be able to do go out. Keep sitting on the fence wat fly and watch the bs!!! You are being played big time!!!
 
I know a good pal who is starting a non religious charter school next year. His biggest competitor he tells me is this new home school phenomenon curriculum taking place. If I had young kids, I would teach with RV life and teach out in Nature. Sorry, but everything is tainted with race hate & bait, plus division and "my way or the highway" and you better take jab or get fired. Plus take boosters forever to be considered fully obedient. My other pal say's his school and class is shrinking and less and less kids are showing up. In fact, Jason told me that his 3 best students are now being home schooled and two more moms told him their moving after the semester. It's happening like I thought I would. Everything has become us vs them. That is a loser way to play life. Both and is the only way to play.

1635444971035.png
 
Grace T. said:
Things getting interesting in NY with the vaccine mandate...who will blink?....1/4 to 1/3 resisting is a pretty big chunk....even 10% is enough to disrupt services as witnessed by the airlines a few weeks back and NY sanitation this week.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1453740746167685120
Click to expand...
Get ready for the metaverse. This is the new name for FB. WTF is up with Zuck? This is how to stay in his 3d world. I'm playing 5D only. Stock is up 3%.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top